Post by amdetron on Jun 6, 2013 2:47:18 GMT -5
Some one had to be proprietor of an exploratory allegiant thread. Paralleled to those random...threads in other typology forums. Originally i was immured by ideas and wanted release. Though there were no prerogatives to do so. An question wasn't being answered by sanction(directly for someone) and a topic was not made debatable. Still i was irritated to bottle it up so i present a thread if permissible by the mods to do such that. The posts i'd expect to be idiosyncratic, inceptive and overall a juggling of ideas. Essentially a thread to exersize creativity. And more to explore possibilities or contradictions then to arrive at truths
M.I and Laren
M.I and Laren
First let me apologize for the capriciousness of my inquiry. I am still irresolutely trying to figure out if this cross examination will yield one. Regardless i am inspired by a vagary and my inquisitive mind can't leave it at bay. Though as i've already apologized for some people might find my juvenile crystallized intelligence i guess we can call it of subject matter annoying.
Before anything else i need to define intelligence
Intelligence: Measure of criterion objectivity
Criteria: Constituents of a paradigm
Paradigm: Congruity of conditions
My description of intelligence is that of a inconstant factor. Though inspired by the G factor where the countenance of paradigms is by holistic brain processes or matching functions through out. But that's a very opaque compendium of course.
Vagaries-
An institution or collaboration among people to propagate intelligence is fundamentally going to be oppressive. I red a moderator write earlier how teaching personality theories at a young age might teach children to accept individuality as adults. I fear the contrast would also be accentuated where superiority complexes would be built on traits proven to be "superior". The G factor is successful in predicting success at career or at least reliable. Perhaps it's a measure of institutive intellect. In which case Caucasians and east Asians on average score marginally higher than other ethnicities. There are similar statistics on graduation rates for top universities. Please don't misinterpret this as racism but do you see where i am going. Call me a pessimist but i doubt humanity can reform it's ways this early.
The intent was clarity, because Larin relies on observable cues to correlate it's theory based analysis perhaps one step can be taken further. If multiple intelligence theory and larin were junctional then on one end subjective presupposition could be solidified a little. It's inceptive to believe Jungian functions are physical processes. But when cross examined with M.I there may be overlaps with criteria. It's abetting to think so considering the disposition of Je,Ji,Pe ect.
Reeks of my confirmation bias- [Si-Ne] Fluctuations [Ni-se] Fluctuations
Logic Mathematical 10-21%[Si] 5-15%[Se]
Interpersonal 15-20[Ne] 3-5%[Se]
Interpersonal 10-20%[Ne] 4-6% [Si] 25-35%[Ni]
Spatial 5-8% [Ne] 15-30%[Si] 15-30%[Ni]
Musical 5-8% [Si] 5-8%[Ni]
Bodily Kinesthetic 25-30% [Si] 20-25%[Se]
[Te-Fi] Fluc.. [Ti-Fe] Fluc...
Linguistic 10-15%[Te] 15-20%[Fi] 3-5%[Fe] 15-20%[Ti]
Inter... 5-8%[Fi] 15-20[Te] 25-30%[Fe]
Intra... 25-35%[Fi] 5-8%[Ti]
Spatial 3-5%[Te] 15-20%[Ti] Mus.. 15-30%[Fi] 5-8% [Fe]
Bod... 3-5% [Te] 15-30[Ti]
The flaw with this association is the empirical methods. It already surpasses the scope that Larin uses. And becomes reductio ad absurdum. People already have trouble correlating nuanced behavior to one function or another. And at this point the relativity can not be explored
G factor is the foil to M.I and as a correspondent to Laren would presume all functions are relative. Where impact is to ipseity but does not pry on core behaviors.
Before anything else i need to define intelligence
Intelligence: Measure of criterion objectivity
Criteria: Constituents of a paradigm
Paradigm: Congruity of conditions
My description of intelligence is that of a inconstant factor. Though inspired by the G factor where the countenance of paradigms is by holistic brain processes or matching functions through out. But that's a very opaque compendium of course.
Vagaries-
An institution or collaboration among people to propagate intelligence is fundamentally going to be oppressive. I red a moderator write earlier how teaching personality theories at a young age might teach children to accept individuality as adults. I fear the contrast would also be accentuated where superiority complexes would be built on traits proven to be "superior". The G factor is successful in predicting success at career or at least reliable. Perhaps it's a measure of institutive intellect. In which case Caucasians and east Asians on average score marginally higher than other ethnicities. There are similar statistics on graduation rates for top universities. Please don't misinterpret this as racism but do you see where i am going. Call me a pessimist but i doubt humanity can reform it's ways this early.
The intent was clarity, because Larin relies on observable cues to correlate it's theory based analysis perhaps one step can be taken further. If multiple intelligence theory and larin were junctional then on one end subjective presupposition could be solidified a little. It's inceptive to believe Jungian functions are physical processes. But when cross examined with M.I there may be overlaps with criteria. It's abetting to think so considering the disposition of Je,Ji,Pe ect.
Reeks of my confirmation bias- [Si-Ne] Fluctuations [Ni-se] Fluctuations
Logic Mathematical 10-21%[Si] 5-15%[Se]
Interpersonal 15-20[Ne] 3-5%[Se]
Interpersonal 10-20%[Ne] 4-6% [Si] 25-35%[Ni]
Spatial 5-8% [Ne] 15-30%[Si] 15-30%[Ni]
Musical 5-8% [Si] 5-8%[Ni]
Bodily Kinesthetic 25-30% [Si] 20-25%[Se]
[Te-Fi] Fluc.. [Ti-Fe] Fluc...
Linguistic 10-15%[Te] 15-20%[Fi] 3-5%[Fe] 15-20%[Ti]
Inter... 5-8%[Fi] 15-20[Te] 25-30%[Fe]
Intra... 25-35%[Fi] 5-8%[Ti]
Spatial 3-5%[Te] 15-20%[Ti] Mus.. 15-30%[Fi] 5-8% [Fe]
Bod... 3-5% [Te] 15-30[Ti]
The flaw with this association is the empirical methods. It already surpasses the scope that Larin uses. And becomes reductio ad absurdum. People already have trouble correlating nuanced behavior to one function or another. And at this point the relativity can not be explored
G factor is the foil to M.I and as a correspondent to Laren would presume all functions are relative. Where impact is to ipseity but does not pry on core behaviors.